I am not that familiar with the assets or income test for the pension, but over the weekend we were discussing the fairness of it all.
A friend's father lives in a modest house on a couple of hundred acres in rural Qld.
He can't get the pension because the assets test only allows for a certain radius of land around your PPR to be included in PPR asset calcs. Anything outside of that is considered to be non PPR asset, and if valued over whatever the threshold is, you can't get the pension.
However, a person whose PPR is a $10M Point Piper apartment like
this one, or $30M Vaucluse mansion like Tahiti, can apparently get the pension because these assets are under the land content threshold.
So from what I understand, it is possible for an Australian millionaire to get the pension.
BTW, I would also argue anyone who owns outright, a $30M home, is a millionaire, but if they are on the pension, what are the chances they can get their hands on $1M cash....